Planta

, Volume 247, Issue 5, pp 1229–1245 | Cite as

Maize water status and physiological traits as affected by root endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica under combined drought and mechanical stresses

  • Fatemeh Hosseini
  • Mohammad Reza Mosaddeghi
  • Anthony Roger Dexter
  • Mozhgan Sepehri
Original Article
  • 199 Downloads

Abstract

Main conclusion

Under combined drought and mechanical stresses, mechanical stress primarily controlled physiological responses of maize. Piriformospora indica mitigated the adverse effects of stresses, and inoculated maize experienced less oxidative damage and had better adaptation to stressful conditions.

The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of maize root colonization by an endophytic fungus P. indica on plant water status, physiological traits and root morphology under combined drought and mechanical stresses. Seedlings of inoculated and non-inoculated maize (Zea mays L., cv. single cross 704) were cultivated in growth chambers filled with moistened siliceous sand at a matric suction of 20 hPa. Drought stress was induced using PEG 6000 solution with osmotic potentials of 0, − 0.3 and − 0.5 MPa. Mechanical stress (i.e., penetration resistances of 1.05, 4.23 and 6.34 MPa) was exerted by placing weights on the surface of the sand medium. After 30 days, leaf water potential (LWP) and relative water content (RWC), root and shoot fresh weights, root volume (RV) and diameter (RD), leaf proline content, leaf area (LA) and catalase (CAT) and ascorbate peroxidase (APX) activities were measured. The results show that exposure to individual drought and mechanical stresses led to higher RD and proline content and lower plant biomass, RV and LA. Moreover, increasing drought and mechanical stress severity increased APX activity by about 1.9- and 3.1-fold compared with the control. When plants were exposed to combined stresses, mechanical stress played the dominant role in controlling plant responses. P. indica-inoculated plants are better adapted to individual and combined stresses. The inoculated plants had greater RV, LA, RWC, LWP and proline content under stressful conditions. In comparison with non-inoculated plants, inoculated plants showed lower CAT and APX activities which means that they experienced less oxidative stress induced by stressful conditions.

Keywords

Antioxidant enzymes activities Endophytic fungi Mechanical impedance Proline Relative water content 

Abbreviations

PTFE

Polytetrafluoroethylene

CM

Complex medium

DS

Drought stress

MS

Mechanical stress

Qp

Penetration resistance

RFW

Root fresh weight

SFW

Shoot fresh weight

RD

Root diameter

RV

Root volume

LA

Leaf area

RCP

Root colonization percent

CAT

Catalase

APX

Ascorbate peroxidase

RWC

Relative water content

LWP

Leaf water potential

ANOVA

Analysis of variance

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank Iran National Science Foundation (INSF) and Isfahan University of Technology for the award of a Postdoctoral Research Fellowship (no. 94027490) to the first author.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Abadi VAJM, Sepehri M (2016) Effect of Piriformospora indica and Azotobacter chroococcum on mitigation of zinc deficiency stress in wheat (Triticum aestivum L.). Symbiosis 69:9–19.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s13199-015-0361-z CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alameda D, Villar R (2012) Linking root traits to plant physiology and growth in Fraxinus angustifolia Vahl. seedlings under soil compaction conditions. Environ Exp Bot 79:49–57.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envexpbot.2012.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ansari MW, Trivedi DK, Sahoo RK, Gill SS, Tuteja N (2013) A critical review on fungi mediated plant responses with special emphasis to Piriformospora indica on improved production and protection of crops. Plant Physiol Biochem 70:403–410.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2013.06.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Armengaud P, Thiery L, Buhot N, Grenier-de March G, Savouré A (2004) Transcriptional regulation of proline biosynthesis in Medicago truncatula reveals developmental and environmental specific features. Physiol Plant 120:442–450.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0031-9317.2004.00251.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Asgarzadeh H, Mosaddeghi MR, Dexter AR, Mahboubi AA, Neyshabouri MR (2014) Determination of soil available water for plants: consistency between laboratory and field measurements. Geoderma 226:8–20.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2014.02.020 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Baltruschat H, Fodor J, Harrach BD, Niemczyk E, Barna B, Gullner G, Janeczko A, Kogel KH, Schäfer P, Schwarczinger I, Zuccaro A, Skoczowski A (2008) Salt tolerance of barley induced by the root endophyte Piriformospora indica is associated with a strong increase in antioxidants. New Phytol 180:501–510.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2008.02583.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Banhara A, Ding Y, Kühner R, Zuccaro A, Parniske M (2015) Colonization of root cells and plant growth promotion by Piriformospora indica occurs independently of plant common symbiosis genes. Front Plant Sci 6:667.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00667 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Barrs HD, Weatherley PE (1962) A re-examination of the relative turgidity technique for estimating water deficits in leaves. Aust J Biol Sci 15:413–428.  https://doi.org/10.1071/BI9620413 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bates LS, Waldren RP, Teare ID (1973) Rapid determination of free proline for water-stress studies. Plant Soil 39:205–207.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00018060 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bayat F, Mirlohi AF, Khodambashi M (2009) Effects of endophytic fungi on some drought tolerance mechanisms of tall fescue in a hydroponics culture. Russ J Plant Physiol 56:510–516.  https://doi.org/10.1134/S1021443709040104 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bengough AG, McKenzie BM, Hallett PD, Valentine TA (2011) Root elongation, water stress, and mechanical impedance: a review of limiting stresses and beneficial root tip traits. J Exp Bot 62(1):59–68.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/erq350 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Borgo L, Marur CJ, Vieira LGE (2015) Effects of high proline accumulation on chloroplast and mitochondrial ultrastructure and on osmotic adjustment in tobacco plants. Acta Sci Agron 37:191–199.  https://doi.org/10.4025/actasciagron.v37i2.19097 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Caverzan A, Casassola A, Patussi Brammer SP (2016) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant enzymes involved in plant tolerance to stress. In: Shanker A (ed) Abiotic and biotic stress in plants-recent advances and future perspectives. InTech, Rijeka, pp 463–480Google Scholar
  14. Daryanto S, Wang L, Jacinthe PA (2016) Global synthesis of drought effects on maize and wheat production. PLoS One 11:e0156362.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0156362 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Dexter AR (1987) Mechanics of root growth. Plant Soil 98:303–312.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02378351 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dexter AR (1990) Changes in the matric potential of soil water with time after disturbance by moulding. Soil Tillage Res 16:35–50.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(90)90020-E CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dhindsa RS, Dhindsa P, Thorpe T (1981) Leaf senescence correlated with increased levels of membrane permeability and lipid peroxidation and decrease levels of superoxide dismutase and catalase. J Exp Bot 32:93–101.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/32.1.93 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eshel A (2013) Plant roots: the hidden half, 4th edn. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  19. Eslami A, Fellenius BH (1997) Pile capacity by direct CPT and CPTu methods applied to 102 case histories. Can Geotech J 34:886–904.  https://doi.org/10.1139/t97-056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fakhro A, Andrade-Linares DR, von Bargen S, Bandte M, Büttner C, Grosch R, Schwarz D, Franken P (2010) Impact of Piriformospora indica on tomato growth and on interaction with fungal and viral pathogens. Mycorrhiza 20:191–200.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-009-0279-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. FAO (2016) Food outlook: biannual report on global food markets. http://www.fao.org/3/a-i5703e.pdf
  22. Farrar K, Bryant D, Cope-Selby N (2014) Understanding and engineering beneficial plant–microbe interactions: plant growth promotion in energy crops. Plant Biotechnol J 12:1193–1206.  https://doi.org/10.1111/pbi.12279 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Friesen ML, Porter SS, Stark SC, von Wettberg EJ, Sachs JL, Martinez-Romero E (2011) Microbially mediated plant functional traits. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 42:23–46.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102710-145039 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ghaffari MR, Ghabooli M, Khatabi B, Hajirezaei MR, Schweizer P, Salekdeh GH (2016) Metabolic and transcriptional response of central metabolism affected by root endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica under salinity in barley. Plant Mol Biol 90:699–717.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11103-016-0461-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Ghannoum O (2009) C4 photosynthesis and water stress. Ann Bot 103:635–644.  https://doi.org/10.1093/aob/mcn093 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Gill SS, Tuteja N (2010) Reactive oxygen species and antioxidant machinery in abiotic stress tolerance in crop plants. Plant Physiol Biochem 48:909–930.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2010.08.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Gill SS, Gill R, Trivedi DK, Anjum NA, Sharma KK, Ansari MW, Ansari AA, Johri AK, Prasad R, Pereira E, Varma A, Tuteja N (2016) Piriformospora indica: potential and significance in plant stress tolerance. Front Microbiol 7:332.  https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2016.00332 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Glick BR (2012) Plant growth-promoting bacteria: mechanisms and applications. Scientifica 2012:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.6064/2012/963401 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Goh CH, Vallejos DFV, Nicotra AB, Mathesius U (2013) The impact of beneficial plant-associated microbes on plant phenotypic plasticity. J Chem Ecol 39:826–839.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10886-013-0326-8 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Gohari A, Eslamian S, Abedi-Koupaei J, Bavani AM, Wang D, Madani K (2013) Climate change impacts on crop production in Iran’s Zayandeh-Rud River Basin. Sci Total Environ 442:405–419.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.10.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Greacen EL, Oh JS (1972) Physics of root growth. Nat New Biol 235:24–25.  https://doi.org/10.1038/newbio235024a0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Grzesiak MT, Janowiak F, Szczyrek P, Kaczanowska K, Ostrowska A, Rut G, Hura T, Rzepka A, Grzesiak S (2016) Impact of soil compaction stress combined with drought or waterlogging on physiological and biochemical markers in two maize hybrids. Acta Physiol Plant 38:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11738-016-2128-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Harrington JT, Mexal JG, Fisher JT (1994) Volume displacement provides a quick and accurate way to quantify new root production. Tree Plant Notes 45:121–124Google Scholar
  34. Hill TW, Käfer E (2001) Improved protocols for aspergillus medium: elements and minimum salt stock solutions. Fungal Genet News Lett 48:20–21Google Scholar
  35. Hosseini F (2015) Effect of endophytic fungus-plant symbiosis on soil water availability and physical properties, and plant growth under drought and mechanical stresses. Ph.D. Dissertation, Isfahan University of Technology (in Persian with English abstract) Google Scholar
  36. Hosseini F, Mosaddeghi MR, Dexter AR (2017) Effect of the fungus Piriformospora indica on physiological characteristics and root morphology of wheat under combined drought and mechanical stresses. Plant Physiol Biochem 118:107–120.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2017.06.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Iijima M, Kato J (2007) Combined soil physical stress of soil drying, anaerobiosis and mechanical impedance to seedling root growth of four crop species. Plant Prod Sci 10:451–459.  https://doi.org/10.1626/pps.10.451 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Jin K, Shen J, Ashton RW, White RP, Dodd IC, Phillips AL, Parry MAJ, Whalley WR (2015) The effect of impedance to root growth on plant architecture in wheat. Plant Soil 392:323–332.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2462-0 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Jogawat A, Vadassery J, Verma N, Oelmüller R (2016) PiHOG1, a stress regulator MAP kinase from the root endophyte fungus Piriformospora indica, confers salinity stress tolerance in rice plants. Nat Publ Gr 6:1–15.  https://doi.org/10.1038/srep36765 Google Scholar
  40. Khan Z, Rho H, Firrincieli A, Hung SH, Luna V, Masciarelli O, Kim S, Doty SL (2016) Growth enhancement and drought tolerance of hybrid poplar upon inoculation with endophyte consortia. Curr Plant Biol 6:38–47.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpb.2016.08.001 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Kirkham MB (2014) Principles of soil and plant water relations, 2nd edn. Elsevier Academic Press, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  42. Kumar M, Yadav V, Tuteja N, Johri AK (2009) Antioxidant enzyme activities in maize plants colonized with Piriformospora indica. Microbiology 155:780–790.  https://doi.org/10.1099/mic.0.019869-0 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Li Z, Wu N, Liu T, Chen H, Tang M (2015) Effect of arbuscular mycorrhizal inoculation on water status and photosynthesis of Populus cathayana males and females under water stress. Physiol Plant 155:192–204.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ppl.12336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Li L, Li L, Wang X, Zhu P, Wu H, Qi S (2017) Plant growth-promoting endophyte Piriformospora indica alleviates salinity stress in Medicago truncatula. Plant Physiol Biochem 119:211–223.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plaphy.2017.08.029 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Lisar SY, Motafakkerazad R, Hossain MM, Rahman IMM (2012) Water stress in plants: causes, effects and responses. In: Ismail MD, Moizur R, Hiroshi H (eds) Water stress. InTech Publ, Rijeka, pp 1–15Google Scholar
  46. Lu Z, Neumann PM (1998) Water-stressed maize, barley and rice seedlings show species diversity in mechanisms of leaf growth inhibition. J Exp Bot 49:1945–1952.  https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/49.329.1945 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Malinowski DP, Belesky DP (2000) Adaptations of endophyte-infected cool-season grasses to environmental stresses: mechanisms of drought and mineral stress tolerance. Crop Sci 40:923–940.  https://doi.org/10.2135/cropsci2000.404923x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Materechera SA, Dexter AR, Alston AM (1991) Penetration of very strong soils by seedling roots of different plant species. Plant Soil 135:31–41.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00014776 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Mckee GW (1964) A coefficient for computing leaf area in hybrid corn. Agron J 56:240–241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Michel BE, Kaufmann MR (1973) The osmotic potential of polyethylene glycol 6000. Plant Physiol 51:914–916.  https://doi.org/10.1104/pp.51.5.914 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Mirreh HF, Ketcheson JW (1973) Influence of soil water matric potential and resistance to penetration on corn root elongation. Can J Soil Sci 53:383–388.  https://doi.org/10.4141/cjss73-055 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Mwenye OJ, Van Rensburg L, Van Biljon A, Van der Merwe R (2016) The role of proline and root traits on selection for drought-stress tolerance in soybeans: a review. S Afr J Plant Soil 33:245–256.  https://doi.org/10.1080/02571862.2016.1148786 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Nakano Y, Asada K (1981) Hydrogen peroxide is scavenged by ascorbate-specific peroxidase in spinach choloroplast. Plant Cell Physiol 22:867–880.  https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pcp.a076232 Google Scholar
  54. Nomura H, Komori T, Kobori M, Nakahira Y, Shiina T (2008) Evidence for chloroplast control of external Ca2+-induced cytosolic Ca2+ transients and stomatal closure. Plant J 53:988–998.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2007.03390.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. Orcutt DM, Nilsen ET (2000) The physiology of plants under stress: soil and biotic factors. Wiley, New York, p 680Google Scholar
  56. Passioura JB (2002) Soil conditions and plant growth. Plant Cell Environ 25:311–318.  https://doi.org/10.1046/j.0016-8025.2001.00802.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. Peškan-Berghöfer T, Shahollari B, Giong PH, Hehl S, Markert C, Blanke V, Kost G, Varma A, Oelmüller R (2004) Association of Piriformospora indica with Arabidopsis thaliana roots represents a novel system to study beneficial plant–microbe interactions and involves early plant protein modifications in the endoplasmic reticulum and at the plasma membrane. Physiol Plant 122:465–477.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2004.00424.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Rahimzadeh S, Pirzad A (2017) Arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi and Pseudomonas in reduce drought stress damage in flax (Linum usitatissimum L.): a field study. Mycorrhiza 10:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00572-017-0775-y Google Scholar
  59. Rai M, Acharya D, Singh A, Varma A (2001) Positive growth responses of the medicinal plants Spilanthes calva and Withania somnifera to inoculation by Piriformospora indica in a field trial. Mycorrhiza 11:123–128.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s005720100115 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Romanello GA, Chuchra-Zbytniuk KL, Vandermer JL, Touchette BW (2008) Morphological adjustments promote drought avoidance in the wetland plant Acorus americanus. Aquat Bot 89:390–396.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquabot.2008.04.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Saia S, Amato G, Frenda AS, Giambalvo D, Ruisi P (2014) Influence of arbuscular mycorrhizae on biomass production and nitrogen fixation of berseem clover plants subjected to water stress. PLoS One 9:e90738.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0090738 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Sherameti I, Venus Y, Drzewiecki C, Tripathi S, Dan VM, Nitz I, Varma A, Grundler FM, Oelmüller R (2008) PYK10, a β-glucosidase located in the endoplasmatic reticulum, is crucial for the beneficial interaction between Arabidopsis thaliana and the endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica. Plant J 54:428–439.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-313X.2008.03424.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Sun C, Johnson JM, Cai D, Sherameti I, Oelmüller R, Lou B (2010) Piriformospora indica confers drought tolerance in Chinese cabbage leaves by stimulating antioxidant enzymes, the expression of drought-related genes and the plastid-localized CAS protein. J Plant Physiol 167:1009–1017.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jplph.2010.02.013 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. Timmusk S, Abd El-Daim IA, Copolovici L, Tanilas T, Kannaste A, Behers L, Nevo E, Seisenbaeva G, Stenstrom E, Niinements U (2014) Drought-tolerance of wheat improved by rhizosphere bacteria from harsh environments: enhanced biomass production and reduced emissions of stress volatiles. PLoS One 9:e96086.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0096086 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. Touchette BW, Smith GA, Rhodes KL, Poole M (2009) Tolerance and avoidance: two contrasting physiological responses to salt stress in mature marsh halophytes Juncus roemerianus Scheele and Spartina alterniflora Loisel. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 380:106–112.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jembe.2009.08.015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Varma A, Verma S, Sudh A, Sahay N, Butehron B, Franken P (1999) Piriformospora indica, a cultivable plant-growth-promoting root endophyte. Appl Environ Microbiol 65:2741–2744PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. Veen BW, Boone FR (1990) The influence of mechanical resistance and soil-water on the growth of seminal roots of maize. Soil Tillage Res 16:219–226.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-1987(90)90031-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Verbruggen N, Hermans C (2008) Proline accumulation in plants: a review. Amino Acids 35:753–759.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00726-008-0061-6 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. Vierheilig H, Schweiger P, Brundrett M (2005) An overview of methods for the detection and observation of arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi in roots. Physiol Plant 125:393–404.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2005.00564.x Google Scholar
  70. Waller F, Achatz B, Baltruschat H, Fodor J, Becker K, Fischer M, Heier T (2005) The endophytic fungus Piriformospora indica reprograms barley to salt-stress tolerance, disease resistance, and higher yield. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 102:13386–13391.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0504423102 CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. Whalley WR, Clark LJ (2011) Drought stress, effect on soil mechanical impedance and root (crop) growth. In: Glinski J, Horabik J, Lipiec J (eds) Encyclopedia of agrophysics. Springer Press, Dordrecht, pp 228–231.  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3585-1_43 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Whalley WR, Watts CW, Gregory AS, Mooney SJ, Clark LJ, Whitmore AP (2008) The effect of soil strength on the yield of wheat. Plant Soil 306:237–247.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-008-9577-5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Xiao X, Yang F, Zhang S, Korpelainen H, Li C (2009) Physiological and proteomic responses of two contrasting Populus cathayana populations to drought stress. Physiol Plant 136:150–168.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1399-3054.2009.01222.x CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. Zarea MJ, Hajinia S, Karimi N, Goltapeh EM, Rejali F, Varma A (2012) Effect of Piriformospora indica and Azospirillum strains from saline or non-saline soil on mitigation of the effects of NaCl. Soil Biol Biochem 45:139–146.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2011.11.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Zlatev Z, Lidon FC (2012) An overview on drought induced changes in plant growth, water relations and photosynthesis. Emir J Food Agric 24:57–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Soil Science, College of AgricultureIsfahan University of TechnologyIsfahanIran
  2. 2.Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation (IUNG-PIB)PulawyPoland
  3. 3.Department of Soil Science, School of AgricultureShiraz UniversityShirazIran

Personalised recommendations